No Penalty Despite Conviction After Attack on City Temple in Vienna
The then 17-year-old Austrian was out with friends in the city center. In a bar, they met several boys. On the way home, one of the boys tried to tear down a flag in front of the city temple. When he failed, the accused was lifted up. She was heavily intoxicated and had a drug problem. The damage amounted to 1,000 euros. The accused confessed to the attack on the city temple.
"Damn Israel" Shouts Not Audible on Video of Attack on City Temple
However, she denied the accusation that she had shouted "Damn Israel! Damn Jews!" during the act, thereby violating the human dignity of Israelis and Jews. The flag had been placed at the city temple in memory of the victims of the radical Islamic Hamas terror attack on October 7, 2023. Several passersby observed the incident in downtown Vienna at the time. However, only one heard the incriminated shouts. This person also filmed the then-teenager tearing down the flag and handed the video over to the police. "That is not audible on the video," said the prosecutor in her closing statement. They had tried for several months to locate the witness, but this was not successful.
Witness of Attack on City Temple Could Not Be Located
"The entire evidence procedure did not reveal that 'Damn Israel' was shouted. No one except one witness heard it, and she could not be located," the judge explained the verdict. It was "impossible to convict the accused of incitement here. It would also not be possible under human rights, just based on a read statement." During the proceedings, it was determined that the accused was more intoxicated than her companions and was likely persuaded. She had little knowledge of the Middle East conflict.
Prosecution Gave No Statement After Verdict on Attack on City Temple
Considering a four-month unconditional and a six-month conditional previous conviction, no additional penalty was imposed. As mitigating factors, the prosecution cited the confession, the youthful age, and that she was impaired by intoxication. However, the previous convictions were aggravating. The accused accepted the verdict, and the prosecution gave no statement. Thus, the verdict is not legally binding.
(APA/Red)
This article has been automatically translated, read the original article here.